If you shot both equally, magazine capacity and ammo price were a non-issue and we are talking about standard self defense +P ammunition:

Would you always choose .45acp over .40s&w?

If not, why would you choose to carry .40 over the .45?

Again, forget about skill level, ammo cost and magazine capacity

.

barth

01-19-2012, 19:11

If you shot both equally, magazine capacity and ammo price were a non-issue and we are talking about standard self defense +P ammunition:

Would you always choose .45acp over .40s&w?

If not, why would you choose to carry .40 over the .45?

Again, forget about skill level, ammo cost and magazine capacity

.

Sure you didn't leave any more caveats out - LOL!

If you take away almost every meaningful comparison?
Then in a worst case scenario of no expansion,
the .45 would have the advantage.

I guess that's where you're trying to go?
BTW there is no SAAIM +P in 40.

K.Kiser

01-19-2012, 19:20

With the removal of some aspects that I think are relavent, I'd choose the .45 due to what I perceive as a softer recoil... With that said, ballistically I believe them to share a very comparable effectiveness all things being equal...

G30Mike

01-19-2012, 19:37

Definitely .45.
.40 isn't bad at all but I just prefer a bigger and heavier slug.

ScottieG59

01-19-2012, 20:01

Well, what about pistol size? The small pistol has me liking the 40 as in my Glock 27. If it is service size, the 45 ACP is fine, and better with +P. Still, my service size choice is the 10mm which allows me to fire the 40 with a quick conversion barrel change.

45 ACP Glocks are not as flexible with conversion barrel options.

DWARREN123

01-19-2012, 20:25

I like the 40S&W and would go with it. :supergrin:

Quarter Tank

01-19-2012, 20:28

.45 all day and night

Pimp gun

01-19-2012, 20:35

In the compact models I would take the 45 anyday over the angry 40.:wow::tongueout:

Brucev

01-19-2012, 20:51

If you shot both equally, magazine capacity and ammo price were a non-issue and we are talking about standard self defense +P ammunition:

Would you always choose .45acp over .40s&w?

If not, why would you choose to carry .40 over the .45?

Again, forget about skill level, ammo cost and magazine capacity

. I have fired thousands of rounds of both .40 S&W and .45 ACP ammunition. I like them... both. Simply because of my experience with and preference for 1911 type pistols, i'd choose the .45 ACP. For SD/HD, either is all you could need or want. The .40 S&W is perhaps ideal for such purposes since so many quality pistols are chambered for it offering high capacity, accuracy and reliability. That having been said, am most comfortable with and simply prefer the .45 ACP. JMHO.

NG VI

01-19-2012, 21:34

Thing is, you can't really omit capacity and still take weapon size/grip size especially into account. There are literally dozens and dozens of 12-16 round .40s out there, that don't have excessively large or long grips, but to get a .45 with twelve rounds or more rounds and a grip length that doesn't restrict it to pure range use, you almost need to have an absurdly fat grip.

A few pistols can avoid that, but for the most part, in .45 you have to choose between a usable grip for anyone of average-lite or smaller hands or more than eight rounds on tap.

I know you said ignore capacity, but the reason capacity is an important differentiation between the 9mm/.40 and the .45 but not so much the 9mm/.40, is that to have a weapon of even roughly comparable grip size you need to give up pretty significant capacity in .45 or go single stack in both, severely limiting the platform options and inherent advantages of the .40.

fredj338

01-20-2012, 00:33

45, all day. They are pretty close but in identical platforms, I am a bit better shooter w/ the pushy 45 vs the snappy 40.

J_P

01-20-2012, 00:34

I would take .45 every time, every day!

JBP55

01-20-2012, 02:25

If you shot both equally, magazine capacity and ammo price were a non-issue and we are talking about standard self defense +P ammunition:

Would you always choose .45acp over .40s&w?

If not, why would you choose to carry .40 over the .45?

Again, forget about skill level, ammo cost and magazine capacity

.

This makes no sense because the .40 is normally smaller, holds more rounds and the ammunition costs less. Your question automatically stacks everything in favor of the softer shooting .45 but it is not realistic. Happy Shooting. :cool:

cadillacguns

01-20-2012, 03:52

.40 because of the bulkier .45 platform Glock makes in that caliber. I like the power and size of the .40 package.

NEOH212

01-20-2012, 04:48

While I like both rounds and own and have carried both, I would still take the .40 every time.

I can shoot it as well as anything else, it does everything the .45 can do in most but not all cases, and puts more rounds in a size of a gun that I'm likely to want to carry with me every day.

.45 ballistics with the capacity of a 9mm in a compact gun,

Whats not to love? :wavey:

TF2Addict

01-20-2012, 07:53

.45 ballistics with the capacity of a 9mm in a compact gun,

The following statements could also be made:

The .40 gives you ALMOST the ballistics of a .45 with ALMOST the capacity of a 9mm.

The 9 gives you ALMOST the ballistics of a .40 with MORE capacity than a .40.

So...

Ballistic advantage goes: 45, 40, 9.

Capacity advantage goes: 9, 40, 45.

Shootability goes: 9, 45, 40 (in my opinion).

Cost goes: 9, 40, 45.

So 9mm wins 3 out of those 4 factors. And since shootability and proficiency (which goes up as cost is lowered because you can shoot more) is more important than even ballistics when you're talking defensive caliber handguns, the 9 is king. And don't say well then .22 beats them all. .22 doesn't produce the penetration or wound tracks the major calibers do.

How's that for justifying a preference? :cool:

fredj338

01-20-2012, 10:35

This makes no sense because the .40 is normally smaller, holds more rounds and the ammunition costs less. Your question automatically stacks everything in favor of the softer shooting .45 but it is not realistic. Happy Shooting. :cool:
Not really. In some state you get 10rds max. So the mag cap advantage is gone. The XD is virtually the same size & wt in eiothe caliber. Even in a Glock, a G30SF isn't all that much bigger, certainly not heavier. In 1911 formats, the 40 has a one rd advantage, so pretty valid question by the OP. BTW, I never worry about ammo cost. I discovered reloading alooong time ago & all service rds load for the same cost, maybe a penny more pre round between them.:whistling:
So 9mm wins 3 out of those 4 factors. And since shootability and proficiency (which goes up as cost is lowered because you can shoot more) is more important than even ballistics when you're talking defensive caliber handguns, the 9 is king. And don't say well then .22 beats them all. .22 doesn't produce the penetration or wound tracks the major calibers do.

How's that for justifying a preference?
Weak, but everyone needs to justify carrying their 9s.:supergrin:

Chesafreak

01-20-2012, 10:46

Thing is, you can't really omit capacity and still take weapon size/grip size especially into account. There are literally dozens and dozens of 12-16 round .40s out there, that don't have excessively large or long grips, but to get a .45 with twelve rounds or more rounds and a grip length that doesn't restrict it to pure range use, you almost need to have an absurdly fat grip.

A few pistols can avoid that, but for the most part, in .45 you have to choose between a usable grip for anyone of average-lite or smaller hands or more than eight rounds on tap.

I know you said ignore capacity, but the reason capacity is an important differentiation between the 9mm/.40 and the .45 but not so much the 9mm/.40, is that to have a weapon of even roughly comparable grip size you need to give up pretty significant capacity in .45 or go single stack in both, severely limiting the platform options and inherent advantages of the .40.

Great point! This Glock 23 is at the limit of grip size for me. I would never buy a Glock in .45 simply because of the larger grip size. I know about the Glock 36 but don't care for the mag capacity.

Dogguy

01-20-2012, 11:24

Well, I own 3-4 .45s and zero .40s. So I guess I would always choose the .45....

Saberman

01-20-2012, 11:29

I love .45ACP but after getting to know my Gen4 G27 I can honestly say I like both now. .40S&W has its place in my safe.

J_P

01-20-2012, 11:31

The following statements could also be made:

The .40 gives you ALMOST the ballistics of a .45 with ALMOST the capacity of a 9mm.

The 9 gives you ALMOST the ballistics of a .40 with MORE capacity than a .40.

So...

Ballistic advantage goes: 45, 40, 9.

Capacity advantage goes: 9, 40, 45.

Shootability goes: 9, 45, 40 (in my opinion).

Cost goes: 9, 40, 45.

So 9mm wins 3 out of those 4 factors. And since shootability and proficiency (which goes up as cost is lowered because you can shoot more) is more important than even ballistics when you're talking defensive caliber handguns, the 9 is king. And don't say well then .22 beats them all. .22 doesn't produce the penetration or wound tracks the major calibers do.

How's that for justifying a preference? :cool:

Very nice comparison!!

fastbolt

01-20-2012, 14:29

If you shot both equally, magazine capacity and ammo price were a non-issue and we are talking about standard self defense +P ammunition:

Would you always choose .45acp over .40s&w?

If not, why would you choose to carry .40 over the .45?

Again, forget about skill level, ammo cost and magazine capacity

.

Most people of average skillset and experience don't typically seem to shoot both calibers equally well, or at least can do so as easily.

Never heard many folks refer to .45 ACP +P loads as "standard self defense ammunition". The most common duty/defensive .45 ACP load has pretty much remained the standard pressure 230gr offering, when it comes to what the ammo companies usually say to their LE customers. The non-LE buyers and shooters may be all over the board, buying whatever flavor-of-the-month is being promoted online or in gun magazines, being sold at their favorite shops or can be ordered. Who knows?

Why would you necessarily discount skill level, ammo cost and magazine capacity when selecting a pistol caliber for a dedicated defensive role?

Most shooters/users of .40 & .45 with whom I've worked over the years have generally found the .45 to be an easier caliber to shoot (using one or another major brand of standard pressure 230gr duty ammo). That's seemed to matter to them. (Reasonably so)

Some folks of above average skillset, abilities & experience may find both calibers accurate & controllable, but may have a personal favorite for whatever reason(s) may suit them.

One major advantage often described in favor of the .40 S&W is that it can be chambered in a pistol of smaller frame size than most .45 pistols offer (meaning something that would also fit a 9mm). That's mattered to some folks.

I've long considered myself a .45 owner, shooter and user. I grew up that way, and continued to feel that way for the first several years I spent in LE, carrying a Colt Commander as an off-duty weapon.

I've been a 1911 shooter for some time. :whistling:

After having spent more than 20 years as a LE firearms instructor, though, and having carried issued pistols chambered in 9mm, .40 S&W and .45 ACP ... and owning a fair number of guns chambered in 9mm (6), .40 (5) and .45 (9) ... I discovered my own preferences have shifted a bit over the years.

I carry a 9 more than either .40 or .45, but still occasionally carry one of my .40's or .45's. I shoot my .40's & .45's more than my 9's, but that's because the .40 & .45 ammo is more plentiful in our inventory ... and shooting either .40 or .45 makes me a better 9 shooter. ;)

I did have a conversation with a gentleman who works back East in one of the colder climates. When the caliber subject came up during a class, he casually mentioned that his agency had switched from .45 to .40 because they found .40 overall offered a better balance of both penetration and expansion when used against armed suspects dressed in heavier clothing. Maybe so. It apparently was something they decided was relevant for them, at any rate.

If you're looking for some definitive and tremendous difference between .40 & .45 ACP for a dedicated defensive caliber ... good luck with that. Use whatever well informed criteria may mean more to you for whatever reasons and conditions you anticipate being applicable in your circumstances.

It's still just a relatively low-powered handgun chambered in one of the more commonly used service/defensive pistol calibers.

You'll find satisfied users and owners of both .40 & .45 .. for a reason.

So, which do you choose?

9mm +p+

01-20-2012, 16:37

I have zero use for the 40 so 45 no question, 20 yrs ago there was a true place for the 40, now with newer loads not so much. 9 or 45 for me.

dvrdwn72

01-20-2012, 17:04

I have both .40 and .45 and shoot both equal. 9mm is good for a pocket gun, but then so is a 22 magnum.

cole

01-20-2012, 18:22

If you shot both equally, magazine capacity and ammo price were a non-issue and we are talking about standard self defense +P ammunition:
Would you always choose .45acp over .40s&w?
If not, why would you choose to carry .40 over the .45?
Again, forget about skill level, ammo cost and magazine capacity

I prefer: .45acp > 9mm > .40sw.

But, since reality does not seem to matter given the question parameters, I'd take 10mm over any service caliber without question.

jwizzl497

01-20-2012, 22:31

The following statements could also be made:

The .40 gives you ALMOST the ballistics of a .45 with ALMOST the capacity of a 9mm.

The 9 gives you ALMOST the ballistics of a .40 with MORE capacity than a .40.

So...

Ballistic advantage goes: 45, 40, 9.

Capacity advantage goes: 9, 40, 45.

Shootability goes: 9, 45, 40 (in my opinion).

Cost goes: 9, 40, 45.

So 9mm wins 3 out of those 4 factors. And since shootability and proficiency (which goes up as cost is lowered because you can shoot more) is more important than even ballistics when you're talking defensive caliber handguns, the 9 is king. And don't say well then .22 beats them all. .22 doesn't produce the penetration or wound tracks the major calibers do.

How's that for justifying a preference? :cool:

I agree with everything you said, except cost. Personally, I don't care about cost - I care about shooting the most powerful and controllable caliber I can. I will pay a few extra cents a round if I can shoot a more powerful round in a controlled manner. So, if we throw that factor out its really a three-way tie according to you rankings (which I agree with).

So all are good because they are very equal compromises with very acceptable trade-offs. Nevertheless, to answer the question, I would choose 45acp over 40sw most times, as I find it much easier to shoot. Although the 40sw does provide a very tempting balance, as it seems to do all things well but does nto excel in any one area. Personally I would rather be more accurate with a few less rounds.

However, My personal favorite,however, is not mentioned and that's 45gap because I don't have an ego or an agenda and honestly find it to be the most controllable powerful handgun I can shoot well. Yes there is still a trade-off of capacity and I am willing to take it. 10rds of 9mm in a g26, 9 rounds in G27, 6 in G39. We all have to make a decision and I think If I need more than 6 rds, 1-3 more probably aren't going to save me.

You have to determine what categories determine more weighting.

Billy10mm

01-20-2012, 22:39

.40 for me. My #1 priority is penetration and more muzzle energy + a smaller diameter means more of it.

Thats why I carry 10mm.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Ebb27

01-20-2012, 22:51

Ooookay.........

So basically the question is if you take away all the advantages a .40 has over a .45 which would you prefer?

A gee the .45.

Kinda rigged for the .45 to win.

jwizzl497

01-20-2012, 23:08

"If you shot both equally, magazine capacity and ammo price were a non-issue and we are talking about standard self defense +P ammunition: Would you always choose .45acp over .40s&w?" - ViennaGambit

"Ooookay.........So basically the question is if you take away all the advantages a .40 has over a .45 which would you prefer? A gee the .45.Kinda rigged for the .45 to win." -Ebb2

Ebb said it best, its rigged the way you have it phrased. It sounds as if you're trying to convince yourself, the 45acp is better. Listen, if you want to make an objective decision you can't remove those advantages that 40sw has. They exist whether you like it or not. However, you can place more weight on those criteria that are most important to you. If Ballistics is more important fine, if capacity is, fine. Everyone has different thoughts and experiences but you cant stick you head in the sand and pretend they don't exist - they do! You need to determine which criteria is most important to you and then go form there.